LENR vs Solar/Wind, and emerging Green Technologies.

  • torque on the foundation is clearly an engineering problem that will have a straightforward solution

    as Oystia has indicated the materials cost of the propeller vs the 'water blades" is cheaper..


    the engineering solution always has associated costs and efficiencies

    higher toppling torque will cause higher foundation/support costs

    modern wind turbines have settled on the 3 blade propeller...with aerodynamic lift..


    although the old wooden windmills in europe were OK for grinding flour


    they would not scale up economically to the height / power of modern propeller windmills.

    no matter how good the engineers were..

    as W has stated , there may be a unique niche market for the Aesop turbine.


    https://www.google.com.au/url?…Vaw0NYEVC2SpS-ubTC5YXg9ag

  • I'll assume that 'toppling torque' means that that the structure will want to twist, enough to topple down to the ground under the strain?

    Why is this a concern with the Waters turbine and not (apparently) so much with others?


    To Mark G : I don't understand how "ambient heat" has anything to do with the claimed efficiency of the Waters turbine. If you understand it, could you elaborate?

  • Impossible burgers are not made of soy. They have no soy beans in them.


    Ingredients: Water, Textured Wheat Protein, Coconut Oil, Potato Protein, Natural Flavors, 2% or less of: Leghemoglobin (soy), Yeast Extract, Salt, Soy Protein Isolate, Konjac Gum, Xanthan Gum, Thiamin (Vitamin B1), Zinc, Niacin, Vitamin B6, Riboflavin (Vitamin B2), Vitamin B12.


    Beyond Meat burgers also have no soy in them.

    And I hope people ain't seriously mad about some soy protein, it's has a good amino acid profile. Are there any significant nutrient compound or elemental shifts in a protein isolate comparing GMO and non GMO? How do we assume the structure of the dietary protein is what has been negatively affected?

    Always wondered why American consumers prefer food made of anything but the food iteself like Cheez-wheez

    Same here I was raised vegan, currently am lacto/ovo vegetarian and things like hard margarine and some the fad *important ingredient*-free "healthy" processed foods on the shelves don't make sense to me. Just eat fresh foods and drink mostly water. As an american I will say conveniance I guess.

  • Mark U. The output of prototypes and the independent reproduction were so much greater than anticipated, or could be explained by energy available from the wind, that Waters concluded that thermodynamics must explain the surplus. That eventually led to his statement about ambient heat.


    I can offer no additional information.

  • Why is this a concern with the Waters turbine and not (apparently) so much with others?

    I already mentioned it! A wall absorbs the full momentum and tries to reverse it. Here (waters T.) you have additional pressure (compression) due to piled up air. The surplus of the waters turbine is from the added pressure as the pressuring cylinder is larger (area) than the area of the turbine.

    The blades divert (split) the forces and a large part will be axial! and most important the area is just 1/20 .. 1/30.


    Wind turbines are not optimized to use all energy of the wind. They are optimized to deliver max energy for minimal costs.


    So lets wait for a reasonable prototype that delivers some 100kW. Pleae calculate the area for 6m/s wind speed what is a common good minimum.

  • and most important the area is just 1/20 .. 1/30.

    I'll guess that you are basing this on something unspoken : that the 'area' of a traditional wind turbine is the area swept out by the 3 blades, not the surface area of the blades themselves.

    Wind turbines are not optimized to use all energy of the wind. They are optimized to deliver max energy for minimal costs.

    Good point.

    So lets wait for a reasonable prototype that delivers some 100kW. Pleae calculate the area for 6m/s wind speed what is a common good minimum.

    Making some very simplistic assumptions (like 1 cubic metre of air is about 1kg, and no air entrainment and other special effects), we would get Surface Area = 2*P / V^3 = 2*10E5/6^3 =~ 9000 m^2 - an area larger than a soccer field - to get 100kW from a wind speed of 6m/s, oy vey.

  • "A fellow attending Mike’s Global BEM lecture built another prototype. What he found, independently, was so unbelievable that Mike didn't dare repeat the numbers until he had additional corroboration.

    A wind tunnel was used to compare Mike's design to the conventional 3-blade design. It produced 50x greater efficiency."


    From the next to the last page on the WATERS TURBINE attachment provided earlier


    As anyone on this Forum should readily attest, experiments are always more important than theory.


    We will be building additional prototypes next year. I will see that one will aim at producing 100 kW as suggested.



  • Making some very simplistic assumptions (like 1 cubic metre of air is about 1kg, and no air entrainment and other special effects), we would get Surface Area = 2*P / V^3 = 2*10E5/6^3 =~ 9000 m^2 - an area larger than a soccer field - to get 100kW from a wind speed of 6m/s, oy vey.


    Classical 3 blade turbines cover more than 4 soccer fields:

    Newest 14MW Siemens 220 meters diameter : https://www.handelsblatt.com/u…-t7xsIdCtHuIf7IZ6CjHV-ap3

    "A fellow attending Mike’s Global BEM lecture built another prototype. What he found, independently, was so unbelievable that Mike didn't dare repeat the numbers until he had additional corroboration.


    Sorry. Such sentences are for kids that like whizz stories or just play with toys.

  • As I recall, most scientists made similar statements when Cold Fusion surfaced in Utah.


    The history of science is sadly a long story of dogma in a field where human survival demands open minds.


    When the Wright Brothers flew in 1903 few believed heavier than air flight was possible. It took five years for Scientific American, the NY Times and the Smithsonian to acknowledge the new reality.

  • As I recall, most scientists made similar statements when Cold Fusion surfaced in Utah.


    The history of science is sadly a long story of dogma in a field where human survival demands open minds.


    When the Wright Brothers flew in 1903 few believed heavier than air flight was possible. It took five years for Scientific American, the NY Times and the Smithsonian to acknowledge the new reality.

    The difference is "Cold Fusion" has numerical chemical and nuclear metrics that define what is possible and what isn't given certain variables. A Waters wind turbine that's 50× better than the rest is cool, just explaine how it works. Where the momentum actually comes from? How the ambient heat increases efficiency? There is more energy in the winds water vapor than in what the blades can extract from air differentials. The electromagnetic push, internal ambiance, should come from inside the atom, but outside the nucleus.

  • Impossible burgers are not made of soy. They have no soy beans in them. Ingredients: Water, Textured Wheat Protein, Coconut Oil, Potato Protein, Natural Flavors, 2% or less of: Leghemoglobin (soy), Yeast Extract, Salt, Soy Protein Isolate, Konjac Gum, Xanthan Gum, Thiamin (Vitamin B1), Zinc, Niacin, Vitamin B6, Riboflavin (Vitamin B2), Vitamin B12. Beyond Meat burgers also have no soy in them.


    Impossible burgers are indeed made of soy, why are you spreading disinfo, which can everyone check easily? That is to say the original Impossible Burger contains the following ingredients:


    Water, textured wheat protein, coconut oil, potato protein, natural flavors, 2% or less of leghemoglobin (soy), yeast extract, salt, konjac gum, xanthan gum, soy protein isolate, vitamin E, vitamin C, thiamine (vitamin B1), zinc, niacin, vitamin B6, riboflavin (vitamin B2), and vitamin B12.


    But in 2019, the company introduced a new recipe featuring the following changes:

    • uses soy protein instead of wheat protein, making it "gluten-free" (and more profitable, who would say that? The rest of burger indeed contains gluten anyway...)
    • contains a plant-based culinary binder called methylcellulose to improve texture
    • replaced a portion of the coconut oil with sunflower oil to reduce saturated fat content
  • ), which suppress protein digestion of proteins (antinutritionals are linked to malnutrition of soya diet). From this reason raw soybeans aren't edible as they cannot be digested at all.

    Therefore the switching to soya diet instead of meat may paradoxically increase both malnutrition, both consumption of proteins as a whole by human society (eating soya products leaves you hungry, which is good for their producers, much less for their consumers).

  • I have to point out that the claimed "independent replication" of the Waters Turbine appears to be replication of the modelling calculations, with no device or actual data shown. It seems conceptually interesting but one wonders why there is no video or similar evidence of a working example. One of the articles does mention a comparative test under load between a 4-foot diameter Waters prototype and a 5-foot diameter three-blade conventional wind generator. No photos or actual data are provided to support the claimed efficiency measured in that test.

  • The documents attached earlier comprise what is readily available at present.


    Work on the Waters Turbine is expected to resume in the next few months. Since it is aimed at commercialization, additional tests will be part of the program.


    New prototypes will be developed with the goal of market entry next year. All the materials from earlier tests will be reviewed.


    Beta production will provide important feedback data.

  • Clean Farts from Bacteria...How bio-hydrogen works.

    “This is renewable energy that uses a two-part system; first, the bacteria consume the sugar and as it digests the sugar it produces the hydrogen gas,” Willows explains.

    “Then, we funnel that hydrogen gas into a hydrogen fuel cell which generates electricity.”

    It is very common for a range of microorganisms, like bacteria and archaea, to produce gases such as methane as a side-effect of digesting their energy source. In fact, this methane is a potent greenhouse gas emission from agriculture and landfill. It is less well known that bacteria and algae also produce hydrogen and it is this process that Willows and his team have harnessed to produce the climate-benign and useful hydrogen gas.

    Farming bacteria to produce hydrogen also has economic and environmental advantages – in the right setting, bacteria rapidly multiply, they are cheap to create and don’t need much space.

    The University team has used genetic engineering approaches to change the DNA of certain strains of E. coli bacteria to produce hydrogen from sugars.

    By accelerating the metabolism of the bacteria and finding the optimum conditions for production, they have produced a strain that makes hydrogen at rates higher than any previous published rates of bacterial bio-hydrogen.




    https://www.technologynetworks…eap-clean-hydrogen-324819